Transfer Release Clauses: good or bad?

Member 5225

Guest
So every player in La Liga has to have a transfer release clause, I believe.
Obviously not the case elsewhere (i.e. PL etc).

With the recent transfer of Laporte to City and non transfer of Mahrez to City, are you in the mandatory release clauses are good or bad camp?
 
Depends on who’s perspective you look at it from, but overall I would say it’s more good than bad. A player will always view it as a positive, as it leaves them with a way to transfer clubs if their current club doesn’t want to negotiate. Similarly for a buying club, you have a set price you know you can meet to get the player, regardless of the wishes of the current club.

For the selling club it’s a bit trickier, since they won’t get the chance to negotiate to get as much money as they may want for a player. If however you have a player you absolutely will not sell under any circumstances, then you make the release clause as high as possible (Isn’t Messi’s around a billion pounds?). There will be exceptional cases, like Neymar, but you could always say for an asset as valuable as him perhaps they should have made the release clause higher than 200 million and perhaps closer to the realm of Messi’s release clause.
 
Good. Clubs have a bargaining tool to keep wages down by letting the player have a lower release clause while the players have the freedom to move once the agreed upon fee is met.
 
beergod said:
Good. Clubs have a bargaining tool to keep wages down by letting the player have a lower release clause while the players have the freedom to move once the agreed upon fee is met.
Click to expand...
fair point
 
Member 5225 said:
Even if that meant likes of Kane, Alli, Eriksen, etc could just walk out (if money was met)?
Would Lloris still be at the club?
Click to expand...

All depends what the release clause was, obviously if a player demanded a lower release clause that would effect his salary while a higher one would increase it.

Why wouldn't Lloris still be at the club? Lloris has spoken many times what his position is. As for the others you mention I'm not aware of any confirmed interest in any of them. Of course knowing Levy the release clauses for our best players would be very high, even if it was met the player would actually have to want to go, he could still turn down the move.
 
Should be mandatory. The lower the release clause the lower the players wages should be. It really annoys me when a player spits there dummy out when they can’t join a big club,but were happy to sign a new long term contract with higher wages when it’s offered to them.
 
I believe release clauses are a great thing as it gives talent a way out for (presumably) a lesser wage-deal then and there. I believe any talent that intends to go through low or mid-table clubs should tell their agents to get a release clause that they both agree could be achievable with the progress they foresee.

I'm not sure how I feel about them for key-players at top clubs though. Especially as I'm a fan of a historically top club and currently looking to get 2nd place in the league after a fair few years below minimum expectations.
I'd like to think that there was loyalty enough in top football for a great player to give a club a few years to try and sort things out even if they had a easy out after a bad year, but I somehow doubt it considering loyalty is a two-way street that is rarely walker in today's game even when there isn't release clauses as a norm.

But yeah, if I was a professional footballer under 25 and not at a top club yet, I'd really want a release clause in my contract even if I had to sacrifice some wages to get it there. It would simplify a potential transfer a lot.
Of course, this is seeing from the outside looking in, so they might not see it as worth the reduced wages.
 
Ødegaard said:
I believe release clauses are a great thing as it gives talent a way out for (presumably) a lesser wage-deal then and there. I believe any talent that intends to go through low or mid-table clubs should tell their agents to get a release clause that they both agree could be achievable with the progress they foresee.

I'm not sure how I feel about them for key-players at top clubs though. Especially as I'm a fan of a historically top club and currently looking to get 2nd place in the league after a fair few years below minimum expectations.
I'd like to think that there was loyalty enough in top football for a great player to give a club a few years to try and sort things out even if they had a easy out after a bad year, but I somehow doubt it considering loyalty is a two-way street that is rarely walker in today's game even when there isn't release clauses as a norm.

But yeah, if I was a professional footballer under 25 and not at a top club yet, I'd really want a release clause in my contract even if I had to sacrifice some wages to get it there. It would simplify a potential transfer a lot.
Of course, this is seeing from the outside looking in, so they might not see it as worth the reduced wages.
Click to expand...

That's a bit elitist.

Also you have to remember that people coming through and making it on the big stage owe A LOT to the club that gave them the opportunity. Say a young guy said I want such and such a release clause and the club said on your bike... that could very well be the breaking of his career. Yes talent and hard work is required to be a top player, but there is luck and opportunity evolved as well.
 
I'm not a fan of them at all. I think football would benefit from less fluctuation on all levels, and they only increase the number of transfers... Additionally if you're a fan of a club that is not in the top 3-4 of its country and one of the players exceeds expectations just slightly it is guaranteed they'll leave within the next 6 months (After Bosman before the widespread use of release clauses it would be a year or possibly two plus decent compensation if they continued to impress). Now they're just bought up cheap by a slightly larger club, who in turn sell them again to a slightly larger club if they exceed expectations slightly again... Also it makes football more predictable and hence more boring.
 
InLevyITrust said:
That's a bit elitist.

Also you have to remember that people coming through and making it on the big stage owe A LOT to the club that gave them the opportunity. Say a young guy said I want such and such a release clause and the club said on your bike... that could very well be the breaking of his career. Yes talent and hard work is required to be a top player, but there is luck and opportunity evolved as well.
Click to expand...
Read on.
I'm thinking from the players perspective and acknowledge that my judgement on implementation at top clubs is likely biased due to my wish for United to be and stay a top club.
 
Class of 63 said:
When we sold Gerard Piqué back to Barcelona(08)for £6m they instantly gave him a £50m buy-out clause, well if they valued him at that then, why the hell did they only offer £6m ?
Click to expand...

Obviously to keep hold of him, I can't remember but was his contract not running down?
 
Good.

The amounts are generally very high: good for the potential seller.
The amount is also good for the buyer in order to set the right starting point in the negotiation process.
The clause enables a player to leave a modest club (like Barcelona) without its consent in order to join a top club (like PSG).

@Paz Please could you rename the thread? Something like 'Transfer Release Clauses: good or excellent?' for example.
 
Last edited:
Most definitely. The idea that there is no way at all out of a 5 year deal if the club decides there isn’t doesn’t sit well with me.
 
I think it makes sense if it's common elsewhere as the example of Pique shows above. The higher the clause, the higher your salary, though. If you really want to get rid of a player, I suppose you can drop the figure. But if RM decide to come for Pogba or DDG a high reléase clause gives the club more power that without one.
 
Every player has a value on the market and i guess release clauses only mention that. Most teams and players have a good relationship with each other and the necessity is just formal.
 
I like the idea but they should not be random, they should be set as an agreed value between the club and a player but as some sort of a percentage/multiplier of their salary, transfer fee etc.
 
Not keen on them. If I'm a club owner I make everyones £1000m if they're madatory or we don't sign the player.

If one of the things on your mind when signing is how much you can leave for then it doesn't bode well.
 
Class of 63 said:
Don't know about his contract situation at the time, but United were never going to price the lad who was obviously homesick(he was on loan @ Real Zaragoza the previous season)out of a move.
Click to expand...

I guess when your filthy rich you can do that but you have to admire Southampton getting what they got for VVD.
 
not really a fan, only way to fix transfers is to have a maximum net spend for each club
 
I think clauses could work, but they should be adjustable every season. If a players form goes through the roof and they turn into the new Messi in 1 season, losing them for 15m would be an absolute killer.
 
Apparently Madrid have Release clauses in the high £100M's while Barcas have typically been a lot lower - although their players are at similar market values and wages. I understand in La Liga you are meant to be linked to wages so why the discrepancy? If there is no firm link why not insist the release clause is £1bn which is effectively the same as no release clause, players are signing contracts now with no clause so they should be just as willing.
 
I wonder if it would work if they weren't arbitrary numbers but a calculation based off their yearly wages. like (wage * # years of contract) * 2 or something.
 
Should be mandatory, the way PSG can just refuse to let player leave is modern day slavery. ;)
 
Should be a mandatory thing, however the amount that is assigned to a contract needs to be based on some formula rather than assigning it a random number like we hear in cases of CR7, Messi, Asensio and so on.
Believe there should be a variety of factors that should be in place on which this formula needs to be based on:
1. Player salary- The most important factor. If you are paying Kane 100k/week, you can't be rejecting offers of 70m! If you value him so highly, pay him accordingly
2. Length of contract remaining- Obvious one: If a player is having just 1 year left on contract, his valuation needs to be different from someone of same ability but having 4 years left
3. Home grown player- Since, HG players are highly valued and required to fulfill squad quotas, guys like Lingard and Rashford should have a higher release clause than similar ability players who are not HG
4. Position (GK/Defender/Midfielder/Attacker)
5. League games played in last season/average games played in last 2 seasons- If a player is not getting game time, irrespective of what the contract says, he should be allowed to leave for a cheaper amount
6. Other factors- club size (based on UEFA ranking), etc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.